PizzaJedi81:Baron Harkonnen: FirstNationalBastard: I think you got Mary Sue's last name wrong.

You meant "Pond".

You must be trolling.

Or he genuinely doesn't like Amy. It's possible, ya know.

In my opinion, "ZOMG REDHEAD POST MOAR PICS!!!11112ELEVENTY" let Moffat and crew get away with making the companion a really bad character that no one would have let RTD get away with when it was Rose or Donna.

I mean, people still shiat about the one Rose intro, or the fact that she came back for a couple of episodes in season 4, after her story should have been over. But the Amy Pond intro, and the first 5 episodes of season 7? No complaints, though those things were all much worse than what was done with Rose.

And while Rose might have wanted timelord cock, her story didn't shuffle the Doctor into being a background character in his own show. Every episode couldn't be boiled down to The Doctor's motivation for everything being WHERE'S ROSE FIND ROSE LOVE ROSE ROSE ROSE ROSE ROSE ROSE ROSE the way it was in the first two Matt Smith seasons.

One again, just an opinion, and before anyone tells me to quit watching, The redhead is gone, so there are no problems at this time. The new companion seems interesting so far.

FirstNationalBastard:In my opinion, "ZOMG REDHEAD POST MOAR PICS!!!11112ELEVENTY" let Moffat and crew get away with making the companion a really bad character that no one would have let RTD get away with when it was Rose or Donna.

I mean, people still shiat about the one Rose intro, or the fact that she came back for a couple of episodes in season 4, after her story should have been over. But the Amy Pond intro, and the first 5 episodes of season 7? No complaints, though those things were all much worse than what was done with Rose.

And while Rose might have wanted timelord cock, her story didn't shuffle the Doctor into being a background character in his own show. Every episode couldn't be boiled down to The Doctor's motivation for everything being WHERE'S ROSE FIND ROSE LOVE ROSE ROSE ROSE ROSE ROSE ROSE ROSE the way it was in the first two Matt Smith seasons.

One again, just an opinion, and before anyone tells me to quit watching, The redhead is gone, so there are no problems at this time. The new companion seems interesting so far.

We disagree. I thought Rose was annoying as shiat, and the 'I have to leave you in a parallel dimension but I l-' part was just stupid. But it's only a tv show we are disagreeing over, so it really doesn't matter.

? Because my wife stopped watching in the Tennant era because every episode was WHERE'S ROSE FIND ROSE LOVE ROSEROSEROSE. Specifically, she stopped at "The Satan Pit", which was also a painfully stupid episode. The reuse of Sutekh's voice actor was a nice callback, and the Ood looked cool, which were about the only positive things in that two-parter.

The idea that the companion is actually the protagonist of the show isn't new, and it's been a thread that's been present in the entirety of NuWho (and it goes back well before that). It makes sense: the Doctor can't really change much, short of a regeneration. His character arc has to be fairly flat. The companion, on the other hand, not only can change, but should. Regardless of the companion's prior experience, travels with the Doctor are always an adventure unlike anything in their life up to this point. This has to have a massive impact on them.

The companion is more than an insert for the audience to identify with, or an excuse to have the Doctor explain things to the audience. Companions are the characters that can change and develop as the story progresses.

The change we've had in NuWho compared to older Doctor Who is simply that it's far more character focused. In OldWho, even the companions didn't tend to get that much of an arc- it was the natives which our adventurers encounter which were changed by the experience. We had a few- like Turlough and especially Ace (who is obviously the model for all of the new companions).

FirstNationalBastard:When I think of Rose, I automatically think of the first season with Eccleston, not the Tennant season.

Maybe that's why I don't see the same problems with Rose many others do.

Same here. I mean, you could see the basis of "Oh, I love the Doctor so!" But without the Doctor really reciprocating. He obviously cared for her, and sacrificed himself to save her, in the end, but it was handled incredibly well.

FirstNationalBastard:And while Rose might have wanted timelord cock, her story didn't shuffle the Doctor into being a background character in his own show. Every episode couldn't be boiled down to The Doctor's motivation for everything being WHERE'S ROSE FIND ROSE LOVE ROSE ROSE ROSE ROSE ROSE ROSE ROSE the way it was in the first two Matt Smith seasons.

Amy was at the center of two huge mysteries the Doctor was interested in (The Crack and River Song). OF COURSE, she is going to be important to the story. Now, that doesn't mean the "Amy Pond Show" BBC America intro was in any way justified, but story-wise I actually think that it is good that Moffat is giving his companions an actual reason for the Doctor to be interested in having them around.

Also, keep in mind that from the very beginning, Doctor Who was more the story of Ian and Barbara, and the Doctor in some ways a background character that did asshole things to move the story forward like intentionally breaking the TARDIS so he could check out the Dalek city.

I think my main problem with Moffat companions vs. RTD companions is that the Moffat companions feel more like plot devices than people. They have no identity outside the Doctor. Who was Amy before she got involved with the Doctor? We get almost zero look at this. Whereas the RTD companions each had nearly half an episode apiece devoted to their pre-Doctor lives, where we got to see them at their jobs, interacting with their families, and just getting to know them as a person. We never got this with Amy, and only got a tiny smidgen of it with Clara.

The theme of the RTD companions seemed to be "this could be you", by portraying them as completely normal people who just happened to express a good amount of initiative when they got tangled up in whatever mess the Doctor happened to be involved with, and the Doctor in turn wanted to give them something in return for their help. The Moffat companions so far have both been presented as the "mostest speshul girl in the universe", whom the Doctor is interested in not because of who they are as a person or what they've done, but because of the timey-wimey circumstances surrounding them.

Plus, with the way he initially approached Donna after his ordeal with Martha, you'd think that any potential companion who even attempted to flirt with him would be punted to the curb faster than a weeping angel stalking Helen Keller.

Fast Moon:I think my main problem with Moffat companions vs. RTD companions is that the Moffat companions feel more like plot devices than people. They have no identity outside the Doctor. Who was Amy before she got involved with the Doctor? We get almost zero look at this. Whereas the RTD companions each had nearly half an episode apiece devoted to their pre-Doctor lives, where we got to see them at their jobs, interacting with their families, and just getting to know them as a person. We never got this with Amy, and only got a tiny smidgen of it with Clara.

Well, to be fair, Amy was six when she met the Doctor, so you can't really blame her for not having developed much of an identity prior to that.

I would argue the opposite of this with Clara, simply because a good portion of the Christmas episode was of her life as both a Governess / Barmaid, and a fair bit of her being a computer-inept babysitter in last weeks episode.

I will grant you though, that her intro has been more broken into pieces than some past companions; over effectively 3 episodes opposed to say the first 3/4ths of an individual episode.

whom the Doctor is interested in not because of who they are as a person or what they've done, but because of the timey-wimey circumstances surrounding them.

And this I believe, is where we differ as Who fans. To me that is the perfect reason why the Doctor would be interested in having them around, because they represent a puzzle or some such. Think about it, the man is very nearly a thousand years old; and clearly has no interest (usually) in some random off the street. His very nature is to seek out the strange and interesting and "solve" them. Now I'm not saying this has always resulted in good episodes and companions but I can certainly believe a curiosity being his primary drive behind snagging a new companion.

FirstNationalBastard:I mean, people still shiat about the one Rose intro, or the fact that she came back for a couple of episodes in season 4, after her story should have been over. But the Amy Pond intro, and the first 5 episodes of season 7? No complaints, though those things were all much worse than what was done with Rose.

What in the hell are you talking about? Every Doctor Who thread during the Pond Era had at least one "OMFG WHY DO THEY KEEP DOING THIS AMY POND SHOW SHIAT I HATE HER SHE'S THE WORST I THOUGHT THIS WAS DOCTOR WHO" post. Even now that she's gone, we can't have a single thread without someone complaining about the "Red Menace".

Shan:To me that is the perfect reason why the Doctor would be interested in having them around, because they represent a puzzle or some such. Think about it, the man is very nearly a thousand years old; and clearly has no interest (usually) in some random off the street. His very nature is to seek out the strange and interesting and "solve" them. Now I'm not saying this has always resulted in good episodes and companions but I can certainly believe a curiosity being his primary drive behind snagging a new companion.

The problem with that, though, is that it leaves the entire main cast inaccessible. The Doctor by nature is supposed to be an alien mystery and not a character the audience can relate to. Therefore, it generally falls to the companion to supply the "everyman" role to act as the conduit by which the audience immerses themselves in the story. But if the companion is made too inaccessible by means of being a complicated space-time anomaly rather than a person, then we're just watching something rather than experiencing it, because it doesn't leave us any avenues through which we can relate with what's going on. That's why Rory was a much-needed addition to the TARDIS crew.

Fast Moon:The problem with that, though, is that it leaves the entire main cast inaccessible. The Doctor by nature is supposed to be an alien mystery and not a character the audience can relate to. Therefore, it generally falls to the companion to supply the "everyman" role to act as the conduit by which the audience immerses themselves in the story. But if the companion is made too inaccessible by means of being a complicated space-time anomaly rather than a person, then we're just watching something rather than experiencing it, because it doesn't leave us any avenues through which we can relate with what's going on. That's why Rory was a much-needed addition to the TARDIS crew.

The show is 50 farking years old, so you kind of have to change up the formula a bit. Besides, some of the best Who companions have been anything but the "everyman/woman". Romana, K-9, The Brig, Turlough.

Mad_Radhu:Besides, some of the best Who companions have been anything but the "everyman/woman"

The worst have been the "everyman" types. Ian and Barbara were actually pretty dull. Teegan spent most of her time wishing she wasn't there. Peri. Hell, even Mel was pretty much a "regular Joann", if a bit on the Adric-side of "bright".

Ace, on the other hand, was already experienced at traveling in space and was the sort of girl who brewed explosives for fun. Zoe was a genius from the future. Jamie was a Highlander from the past.

The logic that "for regular people to like it, we need to have regular people in it" is the same sort of clumsy pandering that leads to "if we want kids to like it, we need to have a kid in it". That path eventually leads to The Phantom Menace.

Characters should be relatable, but they shouldn't be normal. They should be unusual, they should be interesting, they should be more complex and interesting than an audience insert. They should be someone the audience wishes they could be, not just a regular person doing things the audience wishes they could do.

The biggest issue I had with Rose was that there really was no reason for the Doctor to cart her around. She brought nothing to the table, aside from once, in "Dalek", where she talked him down. Beyond that, she mostly existed to get rescued.

t3knomanser:Characters should be relatable, but they shouldn't be normal. They should be unusual, they should be interesting, they should be more complex and interesting than an audience insert. They should be someone the audience wishes they could be, not just a regular person doing things the audience wishes they could do.

Exactly. How many "everyman" characters were there in Star Wars? Even the farmboy from BFE was the son of a legendary Jedi in that story, yet people had no problems being able to get attached to the characters.

Plus, I forgot Zoe, who could kill a computer with her brain, and regularly talked down to the Second Doctor. She sure as hell wasn't everywoman, but she was an awesome companion. I think people get a little too wrapped up in what they THINK Doctor Who should be and forget that the magic of the show is that it can reinvent itself whenever it wants, and that is what has keep it going for so long.

Mad_Radhu:She sure as hell wasn't everywoman, but she was an awesome companion.

One of my favorites, and not just because of the catsuit. She was the first companion who could rival the Doctor intellectually.

One of the problems you run into with Doctor Who is that the Doctor is an ancient, telepathic genius who commands time and space while wielding a magic wand that can do whatever the scriptwriters need it to. While a companion can be a useful storytelling mechanic, why is the companion even there, if the Doctor can easily solve every conflict? You need companions who are capable in ways the Doctor cannot be, and that means you need companions who are not just everyday folk.

Of the NuWho companions, the only "normal folk" that was worth anything was Donna, and that's because she could go toe to toe with the Doctor on the humanly aspects of the story. She had a moral compass and a will to use it that exceeded his own.

And for all that people accuse Amy of being "the most speschul girl", she was just normal folk. She was a small town girl, living in her lonely world... sorry. But seriously, when we meet her as an adult, the most interesting thing about her is that she's a "Kissogram" girl with a little sass. At no point is her first season ever about her- at best, it's about her connection to the Crack. In the end, her level of cosmic importance matches Rose's "Bad Wolf" moment- it's essentially the same exact thing (although, I feel, better executed).

It was her second season where, after a series of incredible adventures, she's lost her "everywoman" status and the plots focused on her much more.

t3knomanserThe biggest issue I had with Rose was that there really was no reason for the Doctor to cart her around. [..]she mostly existed to get rescued.

That's the impression that Jo Grant left with me.It feels to me like most of the stories with her would only have been half as long without the 2-3 seemingly inevitable "I have to do as he says. He's got Jo." parts in the middle of each episode.I mean, okay, having to rescue companions isn't unusual, but while he was stuck on Earth (i.e. he wasn't traveling around with her), there was just no reason for the Doctor to drag her along everywhere and he seemed rather foolish for not learning from her being used as a hostage every single time.Well, no reason besides that the Doctor needs someone to ask questions and whom he can timelordsplain things to for the benefit of the audience.

Technically, she really isn't a Mary Sue unless Moffatt is secretly a cross-dresser that wants to marry the Doctor. A Mary Sue character is a fanfic surrogate for the author. River can get a little abrasive at times, but being practically a Time Lord doesn't make her abilities and talents that much of a stretch compared to a normal human. "Mary Sue" is just one of those words that is overused and stretched way beyond its original meaning, much like "Deux Ex" (like when people reference a Cheokov's Gun as a Deus Ex).

More important, a Mary Sue is a character that's added to the story and everyoneloves her, she's the best, and everything basically goes her way. And yes, it's the author's wish fulfillment. I'm loser on the self-insert, myself, because I've seen so many cases of authors having a character that they think is the bees knees, but actually sucks.

Regardless, River is further out on the Mary Sue axis than Amy was, which is what I was actually trying to communicate.

In the ongoing Amy versus Rose debate, I have to say that I found them both equally annoying. I will say, though, that Rose at least served somewhat of a purpose in the episodes, and, at times, harkened back to Sarah Jane: she and the Doctor could rely on one another to make the right decisions at the right time. I could have done without all of the googly-eyed romance.

Amy, though, was just irritating. She swung from being horrified to childlike to flippant at the weirdest times, and, after the first few episodes, I thought Moffat was trying to create our first verifiable mentally ill companion. Then I realized that she was there to be cute and to be a reason for the plots (the most important girl in the universe ... AGAIN). When she fulfilled that purpose, she really didn't do much else in the episodes other than scream or offer a stupid one-liner. It is telling that a wide number of Who fans were pleased to see her go, but sorry to see Rory leave. Rory was a real character with real emotions and a real history. Amy was just the cute chick in the fashionable wear who was awful in almost any context.

Mad_Radhu:t3knomanser: //River Song is the annoying Mary Sue, not Amy.

[blog.angelatung.com image 330x282]

Technically, she really isn't a Mary Sue unless Moffatt is secretly a cross-dresser that wants to marry the Doctor. A Mary Sue character is a fanfic surrogate for the author. River can get a little abrasive at times, but being practically a Time Lord doesn't make her abilities and talents that much of a stretch compared to a normal human. "Mary Sue" is just one of those words that is overused and stretched way beyond its original meaning, much like "Deux Ex" (like when people reference a Cheokov's Gun as a Deus Ex).

Like everything Moffat, he took a great one-off concept and drove it straight into the ground.

Also, are some of you honestly using the stupid BBCAmerica Amy intro as an actual reason to hate the character? That's like hating a movie because a studio released a really bad trailer, its just dumb marketing.

More important, Rory had an actual character arc. He really developed. He started as a nebbishly Arthur Dent character and evolved into a supreme badass. It did create situations where you had to wonder: "Why the hell is he still with Amy?" He definitely was far more committed to the relationship than she was.

While I think much of the hate towards Amy is misplaced, her character was all over the place. I mean, seriously, she just took on whatever personality traits worked the best for her at the time.

This though, I really don't see. Amy wasn't the most important girl in the universe excepting her "Bad Wolf" moment at the end of her first series. At best, you've got the one exchange where the Doctor tells her that the most important thing in the universe is getting her sorted- not that she's important, that solving the problem which she represents is important.

Her second series it gets a little bit stronger, where a plan is put in place to kidnap her unborn daughter and raise it and train it to kill the Doctor. Which is actually a completely insane plan. Like... why? How? If killing the Doctor is so important, there must be an approach that doesn't involve kidnapping his companion and stealing her baby so that you can steal the baby and raise it into a perfect assassin who can kill the Doctor. Oh, but River's got some time stuff, from being conceived in the TARDIS. Big whup. A Dalek blaster would end the Doctor nearly as quickly. Oh, he can regenerate? SHOOT HIM AGAIN.

whizbangthedirtfarmer:Amy, though, was just irritating. She swung from being horrified to childlike to flippant at the weirdest times, and, after the first few episodes, I thought Moffat was trying to create our first verifiable mentally ill companion. Then I realized that she was there to be cute and to be a reason for the plots (the most important girl in the universe ... AGAIN). When she fulfilled that purpose, she really didn't do much else in the episodes other than scream or offer a stupid one-liner. It is telling that a wide number of Who fans were pleased to see her go, but sorry to see Rory leave. Rory was a real character with real emotions and a real history. Amy was just the cute chick in the fashionable wear who was awful in almost any context.

I'd just like to point out that The Girl Who Waited was far and away the best episode that focused on Amy, and I would say the best performance of any companion since the restart.